Just as an FYI, that 1% transaction tax (which I am in favor of) would not even cover what we spend on Medicare/Medicaid today.

I'd like to see that source claiming that. I was talking about 1% a day.

Even if true.....does the US really need a nuclear sub to fight terrorism, the boogeyman of the day? OR those 35 F-Z whatever fighter jet phantoms? Or that new Aircraft carrier that meets absolutely no threat against the US?

There's a sickness in this capitalist society, where we have public risk and private profit...

At no point in that process are the companies at risk.....if it fails, its covered by tax dollars. If it works, its purchased with tax dollars.

Public risk, with private profit, aka the military industrial complex.

Maybe when military bases stop outsourcing security...when hammers stop costing $500.....there will be a time when health care costs are covered quite easily.

Why do stitches cost $5 in Canada and $500 in the US? This society is producing drugs that are literally too expensive to sell. Sort of the norm for this western medicine, which defenders say is the best medical care in the world. That's not even that is true.

The leadership of the party, the Clintons, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Tom Perez, are creations of corporate America. In an open and democratic political process, one not dominated by party elites and corporate money, these people would not hold political power. They know this. They would rather implode the entire system than give up their positions of privilege. And that, I fear, is what will happen. The idea that the Democratic Party is in any way a bulwark against despotism defies the last three decades of its political activity. It is the guarantor of despotism.

Does anybody really believe the Dems don't suckle at the tit of lobbyists and big business?

I'm not even sure why that is inherently bad. The coordination of business and political interests is fine as long as it provides for the general economic good.

Why would anyone expect coordination between business and political interests to further interests beyond just those business folks and politicians engaged in the coordinating, even accidentally?

So so so so so much this.

Adam Smith wrote:

People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.

But then let's go ahead and have those people meet together with those who wield the ability to make legislation and public policy and hope they suddenly decide to do what's best for the collective good (whatever that might mean).

_________________"I want to see the whole picture--as nearly as I can. I don't want to put on the blinders of 'good and bad,' and limit my vision."-- In Dubious Battle

The leadership of the party, the Clintons, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Tom Perez, are creations of corporate America. In an open and democratic political process, one not dominated by party elites and corporate money, these people would not hold political power. They know this. They would rather implode the entire system than give up their positions of privilege. And that, I fear, is what will happen. The idea that the Democratic Party is in any way a bulwark against despotism defies the last three decades of its political activity. It is the guarantor of despotism.

So what does he propose as a solution?

_________________"I want to see the whole picture--as nearly as I can. I don't want to put on the blinders of 'good and bad,' and limit my vision."-- In Dubious Battle

The leadership of the party, the Clintons, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Tom Perez, are creations of corporate America. In an open and democratic political process, one not dominated by party elites and corporate money, these people would not hold political power. They know this. They would rather implode the entire system than give up their positions of privilege. And that, I fear, is what will happen. The idea that the Democratic Party is in any way a bulwark against despotism defies the last three decades of its political activity. It is the guarantor of despotism.

The leadership of the party, the Clintons, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Tom Perez, are creations of corporate America. In an open and democratic political process, one not dominated by party elites and corporate money, these people would not hold political power. They know this. They would rather implode the entire system than give up their positions of privilege. And that, I fear, is what will happen. The idea that the Democratic Party is in any way a bulwark against despotism defies the last three decades of its political activity. It is the guarantor of despotism.

So what does he propose as a solution?

I'm sure the solution is quite Bernie Sanders-centric.

I deleted the line wherein I made such an assumption after asking the original question, but yeah.

_________________"I want to see the whole picture--as nearly as I can. I don't want to put on the blinders of 'good and bad,' and limit my vision."-- In Dubious Battle

The leadership of the party, the Clintons, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Tom Perez, are creations of corporate America. In an open and democratic political process, one not dominated by party elites and corporate money, these people would not hold political power. They know this. They would rather implode the entire system than give up their positions of privilege. And that, I fear, is what will happen. The idea that the Democratic Party is in any way a bulwark against despotism defies the last three decades of its political activity. It is the guarantor of despotism.

So what does he propose as a solution?

I'm sure the solution is quite Bernie Sanders-centric.

I'm not familiar with the author, so I have no idea. But I was pointed towards the article via Ralph Nader, who I think is one of the more misunderstood political figures I've ever seen. He's not a spoiler, nor a socialist, nor even a well-meaning plutocrat. He's a consumer advocate who sees the gov't as our most vital purchase, and we should expect the service we pay for with our tax dollars to work for us rather than against us...

So if he's anything like Ralph, my guess is that he's extremely detail-oriented and tries to find the middle ground that offers the greatest good for the largest number of people.

...And I'm not even saying the alarmist bent in the article is correct, or that things are worse than they've ever been. Just it felt like a breath of fresh air after my billionth time checking the headlines to see if Trump was impeached yet.

Does anybody really believe the Dems don't suckle at the tit of lobbyists and big business?

I'm not even sure why that is inherently bad. The coordination of business and political interests is fine as long as it provides for the general economic good.

Why would anyone expect coordination between business and political interests to further interests beyond just those business folks and politicians engaged in the coordinating, even accidentally?

So so so so so much this.

Because not all interactions between business and government are based on the profit motive. Some people are really supporters of pro-choice orgs or green energy solutions totally independent of their own profit.

Does anybody really believe the Dems don't suckle at the tit of lobbyists and big business?

I'm not even sure why that is inherently bad. The coordination of business and political interests is fine as long as it provides for the general economic good.

Why would anyone expect coordination between business and political interests to further interests beyond just those business folks and politicians engaged in the coordinating, even accidentally?

So so so so so much this.

Because not all interactions between business and government are based on the profit motive. Some people are really supporters of pro-choice orgs or green energy solutions totally independent of their own profit.

Does anybody really believe the Dems don't suckle at the tit of lobbyists and big business?

I'm not even sure why that is inherently bad. The coordination of business and political interests is fine as long as it provides for the general economic good.

Why would anyone expect coordination between business and political interests to further interests beyond just those business folks and politicians engaged in the coordinating, even accidentally?

So so so so so much this.

Because not all interactions between business and government are based on the profit motive. Some people are really supporters of pro-choice orgs or green energy solutions totally independent of their own profit.

well...motivation is everything.

a system based on greed and selfishness cannot possible produce or create what is best for society. Profit is pursued, even at the cost of human life.